İmplant Dayanak Bağlantı Tiplerinin İmplant Başarısına Etkisinin Retrospektif Olarak Değerlendirilmesi: Pilot Çalışma

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 1 - 7, 01.04.2020

Fatma Uslu , Burcu Evlice , M.emre Benlidayı , Yurdanur Uçar

https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.492513

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı
farklı implant dayanak bağlantı tiplerinin (konik ve uç uca birleşim) implant başarısına
etkisini değerlendirmektir.

Gereç ve Yöntemler: Kliniğimizde
2016 yılında implant üstü sabit protetik tedavisi tamamlanmış ve yükleme
sonrası en az 1 yıllık kontrolleri yapılmış hastalar, dental implant tedavisi
için risk oluşturabilecek parametreleri (yaş, medikal durum, meslek, cinsiyet,
sigara kullanımı) değerlendirebilmek için çalışmaya dahil edildi. Klinik
(sondlamada kanama, cep derinliği, modifiye plak indeksi, gingival indeks) ve
radyografik (kemik kaybı miktarı) değerlendirmeler kaydedildi. Konik ve uç uca (butt-joint)
birleşimi olan implantların başarısı karşılaştırıldı. Farklı implant sistemleri
de implant başarısı açısından karşılaştırıldı. Veri analizinde t-testi, tek
yönlü ANOVA ve Tukey testleri kullanıldı (α=0.05).

Bulgular:
Kliniğimizde kullanılan farklı dental implantlar (Implantium, Nucleoss, Bego,
Astra EV, Biohorizons) ile tedavi edilen 19 hastada uygulanan 11 konik ve 8 uç
uca birleşimli implant dayanak bağlantısının implant başarısına etkisi
yüklemeden bir yıl sonra değerlendirildi. Sondlamada kanama, cep derinliği,
modifiye plak indeksi, gingival indeks ve kemik kaybı miktarı açısından
değerlendirildiğinde iki implant dayanak bağlantı tipi arasında istatiksel
olarak anlamlı bir fark bulunamadı (p>0.05). İmplant sistemleri kendi
aralarında ayrı ayrı değerlendirildiğinde kısa dönem implant başarısı açısından
istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark görülmedi (p>0.05).

Sonuç: Bu retrospektif pilot çalışma
çalışmanın sınırlamaları dahilinde implant dayanak bağlantısının kısa dönem
implant başarısı üzerinde fark yaratmadığını gösterdi. İmplant dayanak bağlantı
tipinin implantın uzun dönem başarısı üzerine etkisini daha büyük örneklem kullanılarak
uzun dönem değerlendiren klinik araştırmalara ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır.

Keywords

Alveoler kemik kaybı, diş implantı

References

• 1. Alonso-Gonzalez R, Aloy-Prosper A, Penarrocha-Oltra D, Penarrocha-Diago MA, Penarrocha-Diago M. Marginal bone loss in relation to platform switching implant insertion depth: An update. J Clin Exp Dent. 2012;4(3):173–9.
• 2. Kadkhoda Z, Amarlu Z, Eshraghi S, Samiei N. Antimicrobial effect of chlorhexidine on Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans biofilms associated with peri-implantitis. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2016;10(3):176–80.
• 3. Canullo L, Fedele GR, Iannello G, Jepsen S. Platform switching and marginal bone-level alterations: the results of a randomized-controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010;21(1):115–21.
• 4. Raoofi S, Khademi M, Amid R, Kadkhodazadeh M, Movahhedi MR. Comparison of the Effect of Three Abutment-implant Connections on Stress Distribution at the Internal Surface of Dental Implants: A Finite Element Analysis. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2013;7(3):132–9.
• 5. Mangano C, Iaculli F, Piattelli A, Mangano F. Fixed restorations supported by Morse-taper connection implants: a retrospective clinical study with 10-20 years of follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(10):1229–36.
• 6. Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Dimension of the periimplant mucosa. Biological width revisited. J Clin Periodontol. 1996;23(10):971–3.
• 7. Hermann JS, Buser D, Schenk RK, Cochran DL. Crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A histometric evaluation of unloaded non-submerged and submerged implants in the canine mandible. J Periodontol. 2000;71(9):1412–4.
• 8. Broggini N, McManus LM, Hermann JS, et al. Peri-implant inflammation defined by the implant-abutment interface. J Dent Res. 2006;85(5):473–8.
• 9. Zitzmann NU, Berglundh T. Definition and prevalence of peri-implant diseases. J Clin Periodontol. 2008;35(8):286–91.
• 10. Lang NP, Berglundh T, Working Group 4 of Seventh European Workshop on Periodontology. Periimplant diseases: where are we now? Consensus of the Seventh European Workshop on Periodontology. J Clin Periodontol. 2011;38(11):178–81.
• 11. Fu JH, Hsu YT, Wang HL. Identifying occlusal overload and how to deal with it to avoid marginal bone loss around implants. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2012;5(1):91–103.
• 12. Choquet V, Hermans M, Adriaenssens P, Daelemans P, Tarnow DP, Malevez C. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of the papilla level adjacent to single-tooth dental implants. A retrospective study in the maxillary anterior region. J Periodontol. 2001;72(10):1364–71.
• 13. Becker W, Goldstein M, Becker BE, Sennerby L. Minimally invasive flapless implant surgery: A prospective multicenter study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2005;7(Suppl1):S21–7.
• 14. Kim Y, Oh TJ, Misch CE, Wang HL. Occlusal considerations in implant therapy: Clinical guidelines with biomechanical rationale. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005;16(1):26–35.
• 15. Hermann JS, Schoolfield JD, Schenk RK, Buser D, Cochran DL. Influence of the size of the microgap on crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A histometric evaluation of unloaded non-submerged implants in the canine mandible. J Periodontol. 2001;72(10):1372–83.
• 16. Weng D, Nagata MJ, Bell M, Bosco AF, de Melo LG, Richter EJ. Influence of microgap location and configuration on the periimplant bone morphology in submerged implants. An experimental study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008;19(11):1141–7.
• 17. Ericsson I, Persson LG, Berglundh T, Marinello CP, Lindhe J, Klinge B. Different types of inflammatory reactions in peri-implant soft tissues. J Clin Periodontol. 1995;22(3):255–61.
• 18. Myshin HL, Wiens JP. Factors affecting soft tissue around dental implants: A review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;94(5):440–4.
• 19. King GN, Hermann JS, Schoolfield JD, Buser D, Cochran DL. Influence of the size of the microgap on crestal bone levels in non-submerged dental implants: A radiographic study in the canine mandible. J Periodontol. 2002;73(10):1111–7.
• 20. Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Lindhe J. The mucosal barrier following abutment dis/reconnection. An experimental study in dogs. J Clin Periodontol. 1997;24(8):568–72.
• 21. Bratu EA, Tandlich M, Shapira L. A rough surface implant neck with microthreads reduces the amount of marginal bone loss: A prospective clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(8):827–32.
• 22. Roos-Jansaker AM, Lindahl C, Renvert H, Renvert S. Nine-to fourteen-year follow-up of implant treatment. Part II: presence of peri-implant lesions. J Clin Periodontol. 2006;33(4):290–5.
• 23. Tesmer M, Wallet S, Koutouzis T, Lundgren T. Bacterial colonization of the dental implant fixture-abutment interface: an in vitro study. Journal of Periodontology. 2009;80(12):1991–7.
• 24. Merz BR, Hunenbart S, Belser UC. Mechanics of the implant-abutment connection: an 8-degree taper compared to a butt joint connection. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 2000;15(4):519–26.
• 25. Schmitt CM, Nogueira-Filho G, Tenenbaum HC, Lai JY, Britto C, Döring H, et al. Performance of conical abutment (Morse Taper) connection implants: a systematic review. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2014;102(2):552–74.
• 26. Jansen VK, Conrads G, Richter EJ. Microbial leakage and marginal fit of the implant-abutment interface. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997;12(5):527–40.
• 27. Hansson S. Implant–abutment interface: biomechanical study of flat top versus conical. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2000;2(1):33–41.
• 28. Hansson S. A conical implant–abutment interface at the level of the marginal bone improves the distribution of stresses in the supporting bone. An axisymmetric finite element analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003;14(3):286–93.
• 29. Gracis S, Michalakis K, Vigolo P, Vult von Steyern P, Zwahlen M, Sailer I. Internal vs. external connections for abutments/reconstructions: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(6):202–16.
• 30. Caricasulo R, Malchiodi L, Ghensi P, Fantozzi G, Cucchi A. The influence of implant-abutment connection to peri-implant bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018;20(4):653–64.
• 31. Misch CE, Rerel ML, Wang H, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, et al. Implant success, survival and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dentistry. 2008;17(1):5–15.
• 32. Ainamo J, Bay I. Problems and proposals for recording gingivitis and plaque. International Dental Journal. 1975:25(4):229–35.
• 33. Silness J, Löe H. Periodontal disease in pregnancy II. Correlation between oral hygiene and periodontal condition. Acta odontologica scandinavica. 1964;22(1):121–35.
• 34. Löe H, Silness J. Periodontal disease in pregnancy I. Prevalence and severity. Acta odontologica scandinavica. 1963;21(6):533–51.
• 35. Löe H. The gingival index, the plaque index and the retention index systems. The Journal of Periodontology. 1967;38(Suppl):610–6.
• 36. Pessoa RS, Muraru L, Junior EM, Vaz LG, Sloten JV, Duyck J, Jaecques SV. Influence of implant connection type on the biomechanical environment of immediately placed implants CT-based nonlinear, three-dimensional finite element analysis. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research. 2010;12(3):219–34.
• 37. Alkan I, Sertgoz A, Ekici B. Influence of occlusal forces on stress distribution in preloaded dental implant screws. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2004;91(4):319–25.
• 38. Crespi R, Cappare P, Gherlone E. Radiographic evaluation of marginal bone levels around platform-switched and non-platform-switched implants used in an immediate loading protocol. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 2009;24(5):920–6.
• 39. Bilhan H, Kutay O, Arat S, Cekici A, Cehreli MC. Astra Tech, Branemark, and ITI implants in the rehabilitation of partial edentulism: two-year results. Implant Dentistry. 2010;19(5):437–46.
• 40. Atieh M, Ibrahim H, Atieh A. Platform Switching for Marginal Bone Preservation Around Dental Implants: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Periodontol. 2010;81(10):1350–66.
• 41. Enkling N, Johren P, Klimberg V, Bayer S, Mericske-Stern R, Jepsen S. Effect of platform switching on peri-implant bone levels: a randomized clinical trial. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 2011;22(10)1185–92.
• 42. Canullo L, Goglia G, Iurlaro G, Iannello G. Short-term bone level observations associated with platform switching in immediately placed and restored single maxillary implants: A preliminary report. Int J Prosthodont. 2009;22(3):277–82.